92 Decision Citation: BVA 92-12290
Y92
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420
DOCKET NO. 91-44 189 ) DATE
)
)
)
Sitting at St. Paul, Minnesota
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for a low back disability.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: The American Legion
WITNESSES AT HEARINGS ON APPEAL
The veteran, Vernon Bigalke and Ronald Aalgaard
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
M. W. Greenstreet, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran had active military service from November 1950
to August 1952.
This matter comes before the Board on appeal from an October
1990 rating action by the St. Paul, Minnesota, VA regional
office (RO). The RO received the veteran's notice of
disagreement in September 1990. It issued a statement of
the case in November 1990, and the RO received the veteran's
substantive appeal in December 1990. In March 1991, the
veteran offered testimony in support of his appeal at the
RO. In September 1991, testimony was also given at a
hearing before a traveling section of the Board of Veterans'
Appeals sitting at St. Paul, Minnesota. The Board received
this case and docketed it in October 1991. In November
1991, the veteran's representative, The American Legion,
offered additional written argument on the veteran's
behalf.
REMAND
A review of the record shows that the veteran has raised the
additional issue of entitlement to service connection for a
kidney disorder. He avers that a kidney disorder was caused
by the same 1951 injury which resulted in his back
disorder. Inasmuch as the veteran asserts that the kidney
and back disorders arose from the same trauma, we find that
those issues are inextricably intertwined. The United
States Court of Veterans Appeals has held an issue
reasonably raised must be addressed, Myers v. Derwinski,
U.S. Vet. App. No. 90-221, slip op. at 4 (January 18, 1991),
a copy of which is attached, and the Board finds that it is
necessary for the issue of service connection for a kidney
disorder to be adjudicated before we can proceed.
Accordingly, this case is REMANDED for the following
action:
The RO should consider the issue of
entitlement to service connection for a
kidney disorder. In so doing, the RO
should consider the provisions of
38 C.F.R. § 3.304(d). The veteran should
be informed of the result of the
consideration.
In the event that its decision remains adverse to the
veteran and he submits a notice of disagreement, the RO
should issue a supplemental statement of the case to the
veteran and his representative. After they have been
allowed an opportunity to respond, the case should be
returned to the Board for further consideration.
The purpose of this REMAND is to ensure proper development.
The Board intimates no opinion, either legal or factual, as
to the ultimate determination warranted.
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420
L. W. TOBIN CHARLES FOULKE, M.D.
ROBERT D. PHILIPP
Under 38 U.S.C. § 7252 (1991) (formerly § 4052), only a
decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to
the United States Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is
in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute
a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.